History has shown that when the general population can defend itself, there is less crime. You are correct in your comment that those that commit crimes usually do it with an illegal weapon, often stolen. So banning all guns will guarantee the criminals freedom from fear of victim retaliation during a crime.
Problem is the govt wants to control you. Just like the government wants to be all things to all people, part of that is they want to control everything too. Guns are a major part of this control. They try to create all sorts of excuses to explain reasons for this. They profess that you will be more safe under the banned gun scenario but they can't escape the facts and the fact is, you won't be.
In Texas for example, there is less crime per capita than other states where the gun laws are tighter. It's common sense to know that a bad guy will think twice if he knows that you probably have a gun and may shoot him should he try to attack you.
I fear though that this is just another loss of rights that will come in time. We've already lost the right to own property, speech is no longer free and god help you if you are a white male in the USA.
2007-03-25 22:37:04
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
2⤋
Why do you guys come up with these things?
Is there a bill on the floor of the House or Senate trying to take away your guns? If there is let me know because I haven't heard about it! If not, why the question? You just want to attack "LIBS", right?
I am liberal and I strongly believe in the 2nd Amendment!
But your argument, though compelling, is as old as dirt! If there were no guns to steal and then sell illegally, how would people get illegally obtained guns!
Most murders are crimes of passion and the perpetrator doesn't think a lot about going out and buying an illegal gun!
Even if you banned handguns, and I am not advocating that, I am sure most people are going to go walking around with a rifle in their hands in public!
Feel free to use that argument as everyone does, but you can just put some other word in there rather than gun and use the same argument for everything by just changing a few words!
Don't attack liberals just because you don't like them with an issue that isn't even pending anywhere.
Moreover, a lot of liberals are like me. I believe in the 2nd Amendment but I don't think an average citizen needs an AK-47, an M-60 machine gun, or a M-79 Grenade launcher!
2007-03-25 22:40:33
·
answer #2
·
answered by cantcu 7
·
1⤊
1⤋
Why can you not see the link between having a gun and using one?
It is a sad fact that a person getting mad and having access to a gun, knife, baseball bat or other weapon will sometimes resort to using it and kill or maim.
Because the US has the greatest access to guns it has by far the highest number of deaths from gunshot.
But people who use the simplistic second amendment argument do their case no good at all. In fact they actually help the people who want to change it.
How is this so? Simple if pro gun people cannot see there is a need to make gun ownership more responsible and safe and that they are the very people who should be doing it then they are abrogating their own responsibility. That then means that the state is called on to act to bring in other controls.
So if you do not want to find the government stepping in and want to stop calls to alter the second amendment you have to start looking like a responsible gun owner and champion.
By the way I first used a gun at age eight and have carried a gun all my adult life so I am definitely not anti gun but I am a firm believer in responsible gun ownership and very much for guns and ammunition to be secured were possible and kept away from children unless closely supervised.
2007-03-25 22:38:12
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
It is the individual perception of mine that gun manipulate does no longer and won't each and every paintings. Now, even though the gun ban data you could have is really exciting it does no longer imply it's real. I am spending alot of my time to affirm all that you just stated to additional my argument that gun manipulate does no longer paintings. What I can say that a sufferer that fires again LIVES LONGER. That is the reality when you consider that that character ahas some thing to look after themeselves with. If the folks in the entire nations indexed had been to have had weapons and the federal government nonetheless attempted to kill them they might ahve been met with armed resistance and a there might eb a way smaller frame depend. I dont desire to enterprise some distance from subject but if the colonists fought for the liberty of the colonies to deliver us America there used to be the Minutemen (Militia) and the Military. The defense force used to be nearly thoroughly armed with Kentucky Long Rifles whilst the army used to be armed with gentle bore muskets. The lengthy rifle used to be rifled which made the bullet move straiter and it went farther. When our forefathers wrote the Bill of Rights it used to be their rationale to ensure that that continually stayed the equal that the US residents had identical footing with that of a central authority controled miltiary incase the US govt grew to become corrupt the residents would combat again.
2016-09-05 16:25:54
·
answer #4
·
answered by lacie 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Amen to that! the average citizen has not got a hope, the crooks, thieves and punks have all the fire power, even more so than the law enforcement. Thirty years in Texas, made a believer out of me, I am armed, trained and dangerous.
Only difference, I paid for my guns, training and registered with the locals, just so some creep cannot rip me off.
2007-03-25 22:43:00
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋
No you are completely wrong. The socialists do not care about the lives, except maybe theirs, they care about you being unarmed, period. They are afraid that at some point Americans are going to stand up to a tyrannical congress that is trying to dismantly the constitution piece by piece.
The primary reason for the second amendment was for us to remain free, from a tyrannical congress, and this is were we are today, you can remain free or turn in your guns because congress is coming for them one way or another.
2007-03-25 23:19:08
·
answer #6
·
answered by rmagedon 6
·
0⤊
1⤋
McClean murder rates are higher in europe
Watching Those Whom Lenin Called "Useful Fools" (also translated as "Useful Idiots.)
July 26, 2003
American vs. European Crime Rates
A German lawyer, in response to another blog entry (German Justice: 2 Days Per Murder), repeated the common European belief that the United States has a much higher crime rate than major European countries. The facts are quite different...
[UPDATE 8/15/2003 - For sources, see end of article]
[Warning: this article is politically incorrect. If you are likely to be offended by this, you need to read it!]
Here are Interpol 2001 crime statistics (rate per 100,000):
4161 - US
7736 - Germany
6941 - France
9927 - England and Wales
Thus the US has a substantially lower crime rate than the major European countries!
Here are the Interpol 1995 crime statistics (rate per 100,000):
5278 - US
8179 - Germany
6316 - France
7206 - England & Wales
Hence the trend in the US is towards a lower crime rate, while the trend in Europe (except Germany) is towards an increasing crime rate.
It is true that we (USA) have a high murder rate, mostly of criminals killing criminals, but a distressingly large number of people killing their spouses in anger, and the rate of "stranger killings" is rising.
However, the homicide rates have been dropping dramatically as we have been increasing penalties:
2007-03-25 22:37:41
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
2⤋
Illegally obtained guns are stolen from gun shops etc that wouldn't be there if guns were banned.
Look at Europe. Murder rates in a European country are smaller then murder rates for a single large US city in most cases.
Why? Guns are less available.
2007-03-25 22:30:39
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
4⤋
Right and every Iraqi is entitled to an AK-47 and an IED for self defense and for purposes of a miltia...
The US shall pass no laws against it. You did want to import a US style democracy right...
2007-03-25 22:53:10
·
answer #9
·
answered by nicewknd 5
·
0⤊
3⤋